Andere Kunden interessierten sich auch für
![Aristotle and Plotinus on Memory]( "Aristotle and Plotinus on Memory")
Aristotle and Plotinus on Memory15,99 €![Platonicus amor]( "Platonicus amor")
Platonicus amor119,95 €![Metaphysik und Möglichkeitsbegriff bei Aristoteles und Nikolaus von Kues]( "Metaphysik und Möglichkeitsbegriff bei Aristoteles und Nikolaus von Kues")
Metaphysik und Möglichkeitsbegriff bei Aristoteles und Nikolaus von Kues144,95 €![Space in Hellenistic Philosophy]( "Space in Hellenistic Philosophy")
Space in Hellenistic Philosophy22,99 €![Common to Body and Soul]( "Common to Body and Soul")
Common to Body and Soul184,95 €![Das wahre Selbst]( "Das wahre Selbst")
Das wahre Selbst29,80 €![Der Begriff des Nichtseienden bei Plotin]( "Der Begriff des Nichtseienden bei Plotin")
Der Begriff des Nichtseienden bei Plotin49,99 €
Two treatises on memory which have come down to us from antiquity are Aristotleâ??s â??On memory and recollectionâ? and Plotinusâ?? â??On perception and memoryâ? (IV 6); the latter also wrote at length about memory in his â??Problems connected with the soulâ? (IV 3-4, esp. 3.25-4.6). In both authors memory is treated as a â??modestâ?? faculty: both authors assume the existence of a persistent subject to whom memory belongs; and basic cognitive capacities are assumed on which memory depends. In particular, both theories use phantasia (representation) to explain memory.
Aristotle takes representations to be changes in concrete living things which arise from actual perception. To be connected to the original perception the representation has to be taken as a (kind of) copy of the original experience ? this is the way Aristotle defines memory at the end of his investigation.
Plotinus does not define memory: he is concerned with the question of what remembers. This is of course the soul, which goes through different stages of incarnation and disincarnation. Since the disembodied soul can remember, so he does not have Aristotleâ??s resources for explaining the continued presence of representations as changes in the concrete thing. Instead, he thinks that when acquiring a memory we acquire a capacity in respect of the object of the memory, namely to make it present at a later time.
Aristotle takes representations to be changes in concrete living things which arise from actual perception. To be connected to the original perception the representation has to be taken as a (kind of) copy of the original experience ? this is the way Aristotle defines memory at the end of his investigation.
Plotinus does not define memory: he is concerned with the question of what remembers. This is of course the soul, which goes through different stages of incarnation and disincarnation. Since the disembodied soul can remember, so he does not have Aristotleâ??s resources for explaining the continued presence of representations as changes in the concrete thing. Instead, he thinks that when acquiring a memory we acquire a capacity in respect of the object of the memory, namely to make it present at a later time.